9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (2) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eby disallowing the claim of the applicant for deduction of Rs. 1,63,004.00 from the turnover on this account? (2) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the applicant has rightly been assessed to pay tax on the estimated price of tins and gunny bags? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the penalty of Rs. 2,500 imposed on the applicant under section 43(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, was proper and legal? 2.. The material facts giving rise to this reference are as follows: The assessee is a dealer registered under the Act and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of hydrogenated oil, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred the aforesaid questions of law arising out of its order for the opinion of this Court. 3.. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Question No. (1): The price of the goods charged by the assessee was f.o.r. Indore less railway freight or lorry hire, whichever is lower up to the place of destination. The railway receipts obtained by the assessee were "freight to pay". In the circumstances as the purchaser was required to pay the freight on taking delivery of the goods and the price was f.o.r. Indore less railway freight, in the bills prepared by the assessee railway freight to be paid by the purchaser was deducted. The standard conditions of the contract of sale returned to in the statement of the case include the foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04.00 from the turnover on this account. Question No. (1) is therefore answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee. 5.. Question No. (2): In this case the assessee sold the vegetable oil produced by it in tins and the oilcakes in gunny bags. The question that arises for determination is whether the estimated price of tins and gunny bags was rightly included in the taxable turnover of the assessee. It has not been found that there was an express contract for the sale of the tins and the gunny bags. The Tribunal has observed that it was possible to infer an implied agreement to pay an extra price for the containers and that the containers, gunny bags, etc., had a resale value which could not be considered to be insignificant and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to tax, we held that in the absence of an express or implied agreement for the sale of the packing material, the price thereof was not exigible to tax. In the instant case, it has not been found that separate price was charged for the packing material or that a composite price for the goods and the packing material was charged by the assessee. The price of the packing material is insignificant as compared to the price of the goods sold by the assessee. In the circumstances, following the aforesaid decisions of this Court and the Supreme Court we hold that the Tribunal was not right in holding that the applicant has rightly been assessed to pay tax on the estimated price of tins and gunny bags. Our answer to question No. (2) referred to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
